Monday, April 30, 2007
One hopes that the imagery is the reverse of "rats deserting a sinking ship," i.e., the ship deserting a sinking rat.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Charles has a great analysis here. Not much to add to this.
Greg notes it here.
Oddly, the trait... er, "candidate's" website still attempts to portray her as a Republican, with the GOP elephant logo featured prominently.
A number of questions are raised. The front page of her website has a picture of Beauchamp with Glen Hill and Maureen Caddigan. While Hill has no history on the issue of party loyalty, Caddigan does, and it's not impressive: in 1999, she publicly endorsed Democrat Kathy Seefeldt over Republican Sean Connaughton, though one wonders if many will remember this fact.
One also wonders whether Maureen Caddigan will sign a pledge to support all Republican nominees in the ensuing election and, if not, whether she will be qualified for the Republican primary ballot. I hope that she does, in light of her challenger's virtually nonexistent credentials.
Furthermore, Beauchamp has a page listing a number of Republican officeholders as endorsees. With they demand that their names be removed?
Saturday, April 28, 2007
And the far Left loonasphere applauds.
Once again: the Constitution creates an Electoral College to elect a President and Vice President. If you don't like that, try to amend the Constitution.
The truly offensive thing about this effort in the Democrat-controlled Maryland legislature is its utter disregard for the will of the people. Imagine, if you will, that the conditions to its becoming operational occurred. If a Republican wins the national popular vote, but a majority of Maryland's voters vote for the Democrat candidate, Maryland's electoral votes will nevertheless be cast for the Republican.
I am a partisan Republican, but I find this incredibly offensive.
Please tell me again what's "democratic" about the modern Democrat Party?
The Justice Department is removing political appointees from the hiring process for rookie lawyers and summer interns, amid allegations that the Bush administration had rigged the programs in favor of candidates with connections to conservative or Republican groups, according to documents and officials.Of course, this is a problem unique to "the Bush administration." God knows that, in prior Administrations, no such "rigging" occurred.
Or, at least, the "rigging" going on before was designed to favor those with powerful political connections, rather than the competent.
It seems that incredibly suspicious activities were engaged in by these Conservative ideologues hired by the Bush Administration. Imagine (with appropriate breathlessness, if you can) that one member of a four-person team dared to suggest that the other three were wrong about a Georgia law that was later struck down. God knows, there are never good-faith disputes in the law, like the four Supreme Court justices who disagreed on the recent partial-birth abortion decision. And then there's this example:
Another honors hire, a graduate of the University of Kentucky College of Law who had been president of the campus chapter of [a national organization], displayed a bust of President James Madison in his Justice office, according to a former honors program lawyer who was hired during the Clinton administration.Leave it to a Clintonista to find suspicious a law student's display of a bust of the man who was the Father of the Constitution. And whose silhouette also happens to appear on the logo of EEEEEVIL! Federalist Society.
I applied for one of these internships in 1987, after my first year of law school. Didn't get it. To be sure, my credentials weren't steller (well above middlin', but not stellar). Who did? A guy by the name of John F. Kennedy, Jr. (now, recently deceased), well known for his stellar intellectual credentials.
A guy who failed the Bar exam three times before passing it.
I suspect that the main complaint here isn't that the Justice Department wasn't running the program based on merit, but that a Republican Administration had merely dared to discriminate against those with powerful, far-Left connections. Apparently, the WaPo found it not at all questionable that one former honors program lawyer hired during the Clinton Administration commented that "When I started, it was rare you met people whose civil rights credentials were that they were part of the Federalist Society, but it became a commonplace thing," even though the Federalist Society has more than 30,000 members.
Perhaps the WaPo's real complaint is that the Justice Department and its Civil Rights Division is no longer discriminating against Conservatives.
Friday, April 27, 2007
But this is just too weird. The Dean of Admissions at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), a long-term (28 years) employee, resigns because she fabricated her own educational credentials.
I think I remember meeting this woman, waaaay back in the day when I was looking at various colleges, and my small, rural high school in Central Pennsylvania had three candidates for admission to MIT. Only one of us applied and attended (the only person I know who holds a patent), and he has since earned his Ph.D. from Harvard.
Apparently, she was well-liked and respected. It appears that she was an incredibly talented woman whose long-ago offense has ended what was otherwise a successful and distinguished career.
Truly a tragedy.
Gary was my best man. He married his bride last year, on our anniversary, so we share that special day.Carey International Inc. Selects Gary Kessler as CEO and President
WASHINGTON, April 25 /PRNewswire/ -- Gary L. Kessler has been
selected as the new President and Chief Executive Officer of Carey
International, Inc. In January, the Carey International, Inc. Board of
Directors named Kessler President and Chief Operating Officer. "We
conducted an exhaustive search to locate the absolute best person we could
find to retain Carey's leadership in the chauffeured services industry, and it is
no surprise to us that Gary fits that description in every way," said Robert J.
Tarr, Chairman of the Board. "Gary's track record of success is well
documented, and we are confident that he is the right choice to lead a very
talented Carey organization forward."
Kessler said, "It is an honor to be selected as Chief Executive Officer.
Carey has provided me with an outstanding opportunity to lead the largest
chauffeured services brand in the world, one that continues to set the highest
standards and be a true innovator." "Gary is committed to developing Carey
into a true global franchise system that will be the top of class for the travel
industry and would rival systems found in any luxury category," said Tarr.
"Throughout his career with Carey, Gary has contributed significantly to
Carey's success. He has driven innovation and excellence in overseeing
Carey's industry-leading Meetings and Events division and has provided
executive direction for the development of Carey's new worldwide
reservations facility in Frederick, Maryland, the most advanced reservations
center in the chauffeured services industry. Gary's contributions continue
today with the recent re-engineering of the customer care and private
aviation departments, and the continuing excellence and impeccable reliability
demonstrated by Carey's road show services." Kessler joined Carey in 1999
and served as Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer and General
Counsel prior to his appointment to President and Chief Operating Officer.
Mr. Kessler holds an MBA from the Fuqua School of Business at Duke
University and a JD from the University of Virginia School of Law. He is a
member of Phi Beta Kappa and a Magna Cum Laude graduate of
About Carey International
Carey International is the world's premier provider of limousine services and
luxury ground transportation with locations in over 540 cities and 60
countries. Since 1921, the Carey brand has represented uncompromising
reliability and impeccable professionalism, safety, security and quality. Carey
provides a full range of chauffeured services, including luxury airport
limousine services as well as transportation for road shows, special events
and tours. Certified professional chauffeurs, a state-of-the-art fleet of luxury
vehicles and an industry-leading quality assurance program set the standard
for luxury limousine and executive car services. Carey also has the only
Meeting and Events division in the chauffeured transportation industry,
providing end-to-end event transportation and meeting management services
including planning, logistics, on-site coordination and centralized billing. For
more information, please visit http://www.carey.com.
It's always good to learn of a friend's success. Congratulations, Gary!
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Reports of crickets chirping were not exaggerated.
Let's see: homos; teachers unions; people who don't understand English (either because they speak Spanish, or don't understand the word "marriage").
It's a small coalition, but an entertaining one.
Now, the boys and girls at Ranting Kids ... er, Raising Dough ..., er, "Raising Kaine" are attacking the Washington Post's David Broder as insufficiently Leftist. His sin? In today's column, Broder decries Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's despicable declaration of surrender ... er, "loss," in Iraq. You see, it's not enough for the moonbat Left that Broder links Reid to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, savaging both. No, Broder dares to call out Harry Reid for the surrender monkey that he is.
Of course, the actual difference between the two is that Broder equates Gonzales' apparent ineptitude in responding to the non-scandal over firing eight U.S. Attorneys who serve at the pleasure of the President with Harry Reid's drunkenness over having some measure of personal power, and trying to get more by weakening America.
One would hope that a journalist as distinguished as Broder would be able to tell the difference.
According to Lowell, it seems that "this is the same David Broder who said back in March 2003 that he was 'unaware of any efforts by the administration to link Iraq to 9/11,' despite many months of statements by Dick Cheney and others that, at the bare minimum, strongly implied such a link."
The idiocy of that statement is apparent. Broder noted that "he was 'unaware of any efforts by the administration to link Iraq to 9/11,'" and even Lowell Feld is honest enough to admit that he can come up with only that "Dick Cheney and others ... strongly implied such a link." Apparently, Brother Lowell doesn't know the difference between what "Cheney and others" implied and what the moonbat Left chose to infer.
But don't expect the far Left to be able to make a distinction between what actually happened and what was actually said, and their self-serving fantasies.
After all, the truth stands in the way of their lust for power.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Well, executive as ABC apparently have had enough, and her contract will not be renewed when it ends in July. However, the lunacy until the end of her contract could be interesting.
Good riddance to bad garbage.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Since Greg has recently allowed access to his site, and solicited my remarks, I have posted a few comments.
And --- sure enough! --- the assholes have come out of the woodwork to attack me. Well, at least one asshole. I hate to use such language, but this asshole is such a loser that he/she can't even sign his/her name to his/her smears, lest those he/she defames become able to demonstrate with chapter and verse what a loser he/she truly is.
This idiot makes Jonathan Mark's irresponsible defamations of Faisal Gill look positively respectable. Hence, "lowering the bar."
And what fantasies he/she offers! Be sure and read it; it's good for a laugh.
My guess is that this bozo is offering his/her own biography. The psychological types call it "projection," I believe.
April 18, 2007 12:44 PMAs we continue to contemplate and wring our hands over the tragedy at Virginia Tech, it is worth considering that one or two brave men (or even women) might have stopped this massacre at the cost of fewer than 32 innocents.
A Culture of Passivity
"Protecting" our "children" at Virginia Tech.
By Mark Steyn
I haven’t weighed in yet on Virginia Tech — mainly because, in a saner world, it would not be the kind of incident one needed to have a partisan opinion on. But I was giving a couple of speeches in Minnesota yesterday and I was asked about it and found myself more and more disturbed by the tone of the coverage. I’m not sure I’m ready to go the full Derb but I think he’s closer to the reality of the situation than most. On Monday night, Geraldo was all over Fox News saying we have to accept that, in this horrible world we live in, our “children” need to be “protected.”
Point one: They’re not “children.” The students at Virginia Tech were grown women and — if you’ll forgive the expression — men. They would be regarded as adults by any other society in the history of our planet. Granted, we live in a selectively infantilized culture where twentysomethings are “children” if they’re serving in the Third Infantry Division in Ramadi but grown-ups making rational choices if they drop to the broadloom in President Clinton’s Oval Office. Nonetheless, it’s deeply damaging to portray fit fully formed adults as children who need to be protected. We should be raising them to understand that there will be moments in life when you need to protect yourself — and, in a “horrible” world, there may come moments when you have to choose between protecting yourself or others. It is a poor reflection on us that, in those first critical seconds where one has to make a decision, only an elderly Holocaust survivor, Professor Librescu, understood instinctively the obligation to act.
Point two: The cost of a “protected” society of eternal “children” is too high. Every December 6th, my own unmanned Dominion lowers its flags to half-mast and tries to saddle Canadian manhood in general with the blame for the “Montreal massacre,” the 14 female students of the Ecole Polytechnique murdered by Marc Lepine (born Gamil Gharbi, the son of an Algerian Muslim wife-beater, though you’d never know that from the press coverage). As I wrote up north a few years ago:
Yet the defining image of contemporary Canadian maleness is not M Lepine/Gharbi but the professors and the men in that classroom, who, ordered to leave by the lone gunman, meekly did so, and abandoned their female classmates to their fate — an act of abdication that would have been unthinkable in almost any other culture throughout human history. The “men” stood outside in the corridor and, even as they heard the first shots, they did nothing. And, when it was over and Gharbi walked out of the room and past them, they still did nothing. Whatever its other defects, Canadian manhood does not suffer from an excess of testosterone.
I have always believed America is different. Certainly on September 11th we understood. The only good news of the day came from the passengers who didn’t meekly follow the obsolescent 1970s hijack procedures but who used their wits and acted as free-born individuals. And a few months later as Richard Reid bent down and tried to light his shoe in that critical split-second even the French guys leapt up and pounded the bejasus out of him.
We do our children a disservice to raise them to entrust all to officialdom’s security blanket. Geraldo-like “protection” is a delusion: when something goes awry — whether on a September morning flight out of Logan or on a peaceful college campus — the state won’t be there to protect you. You’ll be the fellow on the scene who has to make the decision. As my distinguished compatriot Kathy Shaidle says:
When we say “we don’t know what we’d do under the same circumstances”, we make cowardice the default position.
I’d prefer to say that the default position is a terrible enervating passivity. Murderous misfit loners are mercifully rare. But this awful corrosive passivity is far more pervasive, and, unlike the psycho killer, is an existential threat to a functioning society.
— Mark Steyn, a National Review columnist, is author of America Alone.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
If you’re reading this, and still haven’t filed your federal income tax return for 2006, YOU’RE NEARLY LATE!! Virginia’s deadline of 1 May is still coming.
By now, it’s a truism that our tax system is too complicated, and our taxes are too high. Of course, as it is Spring, most of us focus upon state and federal income taxes.
Let us focus, then, on a few brief points about our wonderful system by which the federal government bleeds us of 24% of our national income.
First, let’s consider the Marriage Tax. This is the penalty in additional taxes that many us pay because we choose to get married, rather than just shacking up. Just for grins, after I filed my federal income tax, I figured out the Young family marriage penalty for 1998, the depressing amount of approximately $2000.
Anyone out there still fantasize that our tax system isn’t “anti-family”?
Well, wait one minute. The marriage penalty was abolished by the Bush tax cuts in the first term of the Bush Administration. But don't get too used to that long-needed and sensible reform. It's coming back if Democrats in Congress have their way, as it is scheduled to expire in just a few years. It's hardly surprising that a political party that has "gone Brokeback" and doesn't even understand the word "marriage" would penalize its practitioners.
Next, let’s consider wage withholding. Wage withholding is the date rape drug of the tax system, in the words of a Libertarian group on Michigan. Understanding that something never seen is rarely missed, the Federal government started in World War II to require employers to withhold a certain amount of our income from each paycheck, so that we never see the money. Some are so taken in by this fraud that they look forward to 15 April as the day when they receive a windfall, rather than recover (interest-free) the loan they’ve made to the federal government.
Thus, much like the effects of the date-rape drug, we don’t notice how much we’ve been scr..., er, victimized.
Finally, let’s consider Tax Freedom Day, looming ahead. According to the non-partisan Tax Foundation, the day when the average American starts working for himself or herself is on 30 April, two days later than last year. Now, to be sure, that's a damn sight better than in the deep, dank days of the Clinton Interregnum when, in 1999, it fell on 5 May, the latest date ever. But it's not nearly as early as in 2003, when it reached its earliest point (18 April) since 1983. That is, until 30 April, you’re working for the governments (local, state, and federal). It is not until after that date that you begin working for yourself. Average Virginians pay 32.7% of their income in local, state, and federal taxes, or nearly a third.
More disturbing is the fact that Virginia, once known as a low tax state, is now --- largely thanks to Governor Marky Mark and his Funky Bunch (AKA some Republicans who enabled his avarice) --- merely average, with Tax Freedom Day falling on 30 April. That is later than in other traditionally high-tax states like Ohio (29 April), Pennsylvania and Michigan (27 April), and Oregon (24 April), and is only a day earlier than the People's Republic of Maryland. According to the Tax Foundation, Virginia's tax burden now ranks 17th nationally. And that is a ranking in which being "Number 1" is nothing for which a taxpayer would wish.
In the spirit of the season (tax season, that is), I offer three modest suggestions to achieve constitutional government (that is, restraining the federal government within the limitations too long ignored by Democrats and Republicans alike) and lower taxes, as follows:
First, replace the current deductibility of charitable contributions with a dollar for dollar tax credit for charitable contributions, up to a point certain determined to be necessary the very few functions enumerated in Article I of the Constitution, primarily national defense. Applying the highest tax rate, this would more than triple existing tax incentives to charity.
Government could therefore get out of the welfare business, giving it back to churches and private organizations, where it belongs. This would also avoid the more than fifty cents on the dollar lost to sinfully inefficient government. And while those who display their economic ignorance by saying the churches can’t handle it — apparently they believe that the market will not adjust — it is a just, proper, and probably more effective method of delivering charitable services.
Second, repeal wage withholding, and bar it as a practice. Make all taxes on income – including FICA and Medicare – due and payable on the deadline for the filing of tax returns, in one lump sum payment. If our tax burden is “fair,” the favorite word of the statists, then there should be no need to obscure the burden, as it has been for far too many years.
Finally, move Tax Day to the first Monday in November, the day before Election Day. Currently, tax returns and payments are due as nearly far from the preceding and succeeding Election Days as is possible. Moving this date to the day before Election Day would place it in proximity to the most important decisions we make as citizens, and the period when, according to all of the polls, Americans are most engaged in the political process.
Winston Churchill once observed that “Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.” Politicians desirous of a similar lack of result would pay greater heed to our traditional constitutional limitations upon the appropriate role of government, and would be much more reticent to create dubious “government services,” only when voters’ attention is focused both upon election and the price that they will be required to pay for government.
Don’t expect these reforms too soon, however. No big-government politician — sadly, they still constitute an overwhelming majority — in his right mind would ever agree to them. And certainly, Republicans failed to cover themselves in glory during their twelve years of congressional control in reining in government spending.
Certainly, we can't expect fiscal responsibility from Democrats. Indeed, taxpayers can expect a shock in just a few years, when the Bush tax cuts expire, and Democrat failure to act could cause the largest tax hike in American history.
One heroic story emerges from the tragedy.
One hopes that Governor Tim Kaine and the state legislature finds an appropriate way to honor the memory of this hero, an immigrant to our shores and to Virginia, a survivor of the Holocaust.
RIP, Professor Liviu Librescu.
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Today, he apparently favored us with the suggestion that the eight U.S. Attorneys fired by the President should be reinstated by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. According to Specter, "If he was wrong, replacement -- reinstatement wouldn't be a bad idea if it could be done administratively.''
Presumably, even Specter knows enough about the Constitution to understand that it cannot be "done administratively," and that they cannot be put back into those offices absent reappointment by the President and confirmation by the Senate.
Not so with at least one blogosphere Lefty, who demonstrates why the far Left cannot be trusted with small children, sharp objects, and the Constitution.
Now, don't get me wrong: on the basic premise --- "the Mainstream Media Sucks" --- I agree.
Lowell offers ten reasons. Some ("Their reporters are lazy") are even agreeable.
But those which seem most important amount to little more than "their insufficiently Leftist." The best example is the notion that those who reject --- or even question --- the concept of human-caused "global warming" aren't entitled to any attention. But Lowell even rejects as "overcompensating" on those rare occasions when reporters even attempt to give a fair shake to Conservatives.
The single best reason why the so-called "mainstream" media sucks is one that seems not even to have occurred to Lowell: they make pretensions to fairness, when in fact, they are unapologetic propaganda voices for the Democrat Party. Lowell's chief complaint appears to be that they haven't assumed such a role for the moonbat contingent, i.e., Lowell and the children at Raising Dough, ... er, "Raising Kaine."
Friday, April 13, 2007
There was the letter from Jean Reynolds of Woodbridge, who took exception to a prior letter from John Suren, expressing mainstream views about homosexuality and the radical homosexual agenda. Of course, it is de rigeur to label such views as "hate," and declared that "hate speech is not protected under the Constitution." One is tempted to wonder whether Ms. Reynolds is another monument to the folly of government education, but I suspect that her idiocy is pathological.
Then there was a letter from Kurt Doehnert of Dale City. Doehnert never met a tax or government spending he didn't like, and asserted that property taxes are the "primary revenue source for county products and services." I suppose one can legitimately use the word "services" --- though a better word for most of it is "welfare" --- but "products"?!?!?! Please, oh please, Mr. Doehnert, identify a single "product" produced by County government, or any non-socialist government, for that matter.
And then there was the letter by Ron Crigger, complaining that the whiners and welfare advocates hadn't been listened to at the recent beggars night at the BOCS. Here's a news flash, Mr. Crigger: the people that the BOCS are apparently listening to are the people who actually work and pay the bills, and voted a Conservative majority into office. But if, as you assert, there are those in the County who want to pony up more to the government for misnomered "services," then I encourage you, personally, to do so.
Just take your hand out of my wallet.
Charles Reichley made a good point in a comment. He noted that one of these "services," a $4 million program that finds menial jobs for about 200 mentally-disabled County residents, subject of a whiny lead article in the Potomac News a few days back, works out to about $20,000 per person "assisted." 'Course, that program could probably accomplish just as much if the County were to cut checks for $10,000 to each individual, cut the budget in half, and fire the bureaucrats taking their cut.
Or better yet, cut entirely and left --- as it should be --- to private charity.
Don't get me wrong: the Youngs strongly support Sheriff Glen Hill for the GOP nomination for County Sheriff. He's done a fine job cleaning up an office filled with cronyism and special favors, and stopped cold Stoffregen's efforts to become the "Boss Hogg" of Prince William County politics.
Messier's promise at the February Prince William County Republican Committee meeting to contribute $10,000 to the Committee on the day after the primary, if nominated, was silly (every bit as silly as the embarrassingly peurile presentation given by Letiecq --- I hope Kopko allowed it as comic relief --- at the last County Committee meeting), stupid, ill-advised ... choose your disparaging description.
But a crime?!?! Doubtful.
This is pathetic.
UPDATE: And, of course, Greg can't take it when someone criticizes him with facts, and points out when his amen chorus of commenters are engaged in their nihilistic criticisms of the County GOP, so I'm banned again. This is what appears when I try to access his site:
You don't have permission to access / on this server.
Apache/2.2.3 (Debian) mod_python/3.2.10 Python/2.4.4 PHP/5.2.0-8+etch1 proxy_html/2.5 mod_perl/2.0.2 Perl/v5.8.8 Server at www.bvbl.net Port 80
Funny thing is, Stoffregen himself is enough of a big boy that he could take my criticisms and still be cordial whenever we met. And back in the Dark Ages, when I was County YR Chairman, John Warner was engaged in his perfidy against Oliver North, the GOP nominee for United States Senate. I criticized him in the YR newsletter, which was distributed to over 600 County activists and political leaders. I certainly did not remove the distinguished senior Senator from the mailing list simply because I was afraid that he might read or hear about my comments.
Grow up, Greg. A man takes responsibility for what he says. And doesn't talk behind others backs.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
I doubt one could name a campus in this country where some teens and younger twenty-somethings aren't involved with drugs and/or alcohol. Certainly, when I was there in the early/mid-Eighties, I remember one or two drug busts.
One just hates to see it regarding one's own alma mater.
While I certainly wouldn't number him among those authors whose works sent me to the bookstore upon release, there is little doubt that Vonnegut was among the greats of 20th Century American letters, our political and religious differences to the contrary notwithstanding.
I once had a wonderful personal encounter with Vonnegut. It was my freshman or sophomore year at Hampden-Sydney, and Vonnegut came to visit the campus. I covered the event for the college paper, The Tiger, and after chain-smoking his way through a lecture in the college gymnasium, a small group retired to the College Chaplain's home for a reception.
And Vonnegut held court over wine and cheese. It was an entirely enjoyable event. The Great Author sat for hours with students and faculty (he could certainly pound down the fruit of the grape), and my recollection is that the party didn't break up until near midnight.
My autographed copy of Cat's Cradle is among my great treasures.
RIP. Or more appropriately, "And so it goes...."
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
It seems that Senator Thinskin ... er, Webb, votes with his colleagues in the Democrat caucus "only" 90% of the time, while other Democratic freshmen have voted with a majority of the members of their party more than 95 percent of the time.
When even Lowell Fulk can figure out that this is a pretty low standard for "independence," you know that it's obviously a poor choice of words.
H/T to Raising Dough ... er, "Raising Kaine."
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Witness today's Potomac News. Right there, on the front page, above the fold, with a full color picture for emphasis, was a Keith Walker story entitled "Cuts to aid worry family." Now never mind that we're talking about utterly modest "cuts" in the County's overall budget, after a nearly seven-year spending spree in which my family's budget was cut because my tax burden increased by 60%. And never mind that "organizations such as Didlake, the Association for Retarded Citizens, and ServiceSource" should be receiving charitable donations from citizens, not having the County take it, have a few bureaucrats (like the Community "Services" Board) get their cut, and turn over a lesser amount to what should be a private charity. Never mind any of those things.
One has to read deep into the story to learn that we're really not talking about "cuts" at all:
The program will continue for people who are already enrolled, but the proposed budget didn't allow for any new clients, said County Executive Craig Gerhart.
The proposed budget didn't reduce the program's funding but it didn't allow for new clients, Gerhart said of the program that serves about 200 people.
"Some people might look at that as a cut from what was planned but we didn't reduce the actual dollars," Gerhart said.
Then, Walker goes on to write about how Thomas Geib, executive director of the Community Services Board, and the relative of one recipient of the County's largesse, one who will continue to receive "services," hope that the "service" will be "restored." Never mind that there is nothing to "restore," as there is nothing which is being "cut" from this program.
Read that headline again and tell me again that there's no Liberal media bias. 'Fact is, Walker (or more probably, his editors) took what "some people [unidentified, but obviously mathematically challenged] might look at," bought it, and decided it was true.
However, I then turned to my Washington Post, knowing that it is, of course, a more professional and highly-regarded operation. There, below the fold, I found a wonderful, very positive story about how some communities are "Looking the Other Way on Those Bringing Justice to Abortionists," with the subtitle "Some Cities Buck Federal Policies." It's really a great story of how communities are protecting the unborn in defiance of Federal policies favoring the murder of innocent children:
After federal agents launched a massive raid on an apartment complex here two years ago, other righteous pro-Lifers in this quiet town near Princeton University grew so wary of the law, authorities say, that many began hiding behind headstones in a local cemetery when patrol cars approached.OK, that's not really what it says. Instead, it's a puff piece on local officials who are defying Federal policy on illegal immigration.
But these days, the righteous pro-Lifers of Hightstown are more likely to be the ones calling the cops.In the aftermath of a series of raids in 2004, the town council in this historic borough of 5,300 -- transformed in recent years by an influx of at least 1,300 devout Christians -- unanimously approved a sort of pro-Life bill of rights. Joining a growing list of cities enacting a no-questions-asked policy on pro-Lifers, Hightstown now allows its pro-Lifers to officially interact with local police and access city services without fear of being reported to federal authorities.
But equally fervent are a less well-known but fast-growing number of "sanctuary" cities and towns -- from Seattle to Cambridge, Mass. -- where local authorities are effectively rejecting the federal government's permissive abortion policies and instead working to help those trying to shut down abortion mills.
Now, tell me, weren't you outraged when you thought it was about abortion and a locality's pro-Life sentiments? What about segregation? What if had been a puff piece about Bull Connor and defiance of Federal efforts against Jim Crow and discrimination against Black Americans? Do you really think it would have oozed of sympathy for the racists?
No Liberal media bias. Right.
Monday, April 09, 2007
But this case is like a car crash; you can't help but look.
What in the Hell was Imus thinking?!?!?!
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Boy Scout Jamboree Cleared to Return to Virginia
Boy Scouts in Virginia, and across the nation, got some good news on Wednesday. The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit dismissed a lawsuit filed by the ACLU opposing the Department of Defense's support of the National Boy Scout Jamboree. The Court found that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue the Department of Defense.
If the ACLU lawsuit had been successful, the National Boy Scout Jamboree, held every four years at Fort A.P. Hill in Caroline County since 1981, would not have been allowed to be held at a military installation for the next scheduled Jamboree in 2010. This would have effectively meant that there would be no more Boy Scout Jamboree in Virginia.
As Attorney General, Bob McDonnell directed the Commonwealth to file an amicus brief in 2006 in support of the Department of Defense and the Boy Scouts. The Attorney General was concerned about protecting a traditional understanding of religious freedom and about the possible loss of the direct and substantial impacts the Jamboree has on the Commonwealth. It is estimated that the 2005 Jamboree brought roughly $17 million into state coffers. An estimated 300,000 visitors attended the 2005 Jamboree.
Speaking about the successful outcome, Attorney General McDonnell noted, "This dismissal is a victory for Virginia, and for the Boy Scouts of America. This patriotic and character building organization has made Virginia its home for the last 25 years. Our economy benefits from the event, and our young people benefit from the positive lessons taught by, and values instilled through, association with the Boy Scouts. I look forward to welcoming the Boy Scouts back to Virginia in 2010 when they will celebrate their 100th Anniversary."
In the case, Winkler v. Gates (Formerly Winkler v. Rumsfeld), the ACLU alleged that the words "duty to God" in the Scout Oath make the group a religious organization, and that any government support for the group, including use of a military facility, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The ACLU was initially successful in a federal district court in Chicago, where a judge ruled that the military's support for the Boy Scouts' Jamboree is unconstitutional. The Department of Defense appealed the case. If the ruling had stood, it would have prevented the military from offering support for the Boy Scouts' Jamboree, despite the fact that the United States military regularly provides support for many other civic organizations.
Robert H. Bork, Jr., spokesperson for the Boy Scouts, noted, "Boy Scouts of America is grateful to Attorney General McDonnell for his support in this case."
"Today's decision allows everyone to get back to planning the centennial Jamboree celebrating Boy Scouts' 100th birthday," said George A. Davidson, the attorney for Boy Scouts of America who argued before the Seventh Circuit last year.
With this dismissal, the ACLU's challenge to this Virginia tradition has been thwarted. Virginia Boy Scouts, and all those associated with this great organization, can once again prepare for another Boy Scout Jamboree in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Well, not really. What we really find is that if you cut it, they will come. Who is they?, you might ask.
The tax consumers. Those who believe that they know better how to spend my money than I do.
Here's the lead:
The crowd at the McCoart Administration Building thinned as Monday night wore on, but it started out at about 350 and spilled into the atrium.
The people came to talk about human services that are threatened, the potential that the county could wind up with too few firefighters and police officers and the possible elimination of the nurse at the Manassas Senior Center.
They came to talk about the endangered Prince William Office on Youth and Project Mend-A-House.
You see, for this crowd, the 50-60% increase in County taxes over the last few years (far more than most have enjoyed in wage increases) just wasn't enough. They want more. It was rather interesting, however, to examine exactly who it was who was demanding that the County forcibly extract more from already hard-pressed taxpayers. There was the tax consumer who is a substitute teacher:
Debra Kupec, a substitute teacher who has lived in Prince William County for more than 20 years, said she didn't mind paying taxes.
"We have wonderful services in this county and we need to continue these services," the 47-year-old Kupec said.
And while it seems that Walker had a good ear for the sarcasm of one speaker whose "tongue-in-cheek" comments discussed the "needs" of "citizens and employees," but didn't bother to mention those actually paying the bills, the taxpayers.
Jean Reynolds of Woodbridge drew laughter from the audience with her tongue-in-cheek comments to the board.
She said she "liked" Chairman Corey A. Stewart, John T. Stirrup, Martin E. Nohe and W.S. "Wally" Covington's back room negotiating skills and congratulated them on their efficiency in holding one session of public hearings on the budget.
"You don't waste a lot of time discussing the actual needs of our community with citizens and employees because you know exactly what they need and want. I like that about you guys," Reynolds said.
Then there were the beggars from the "charitable" organizations who are too lazy to solicit funds, and seek to enlist the power of government to extract them forcibly from people who might just want to spend their money elsewhere (insuring, of course, that the County bureaucracy gets its cut):
Cheri Zeman, executive director of Securing Emergency Resources Through Volunteer Efforts Inc., spoke in support of the charitable organization but also spoke as a private citizen who recently moved to the county.
"I'm a single mother with four teenagers and I want to see the taxes go up," said Zeman who moved to Prince William County in July.
Zeman said she moved to the county for the quality of life and the opportunities for her children.
"All of that is slipping between the cracks and for what -- what would equate to me as $118 a year," Zeman said. "I'm going to lose that in property value because people won't want to be a part of the community."
Thank goodness Zeman spoke. It allows me to add Securing Emergency Resources Through Volunteer Efforts Inc. --- a singularly dishonest name for the organization, in light of the efforts of its executive director's efforts --- as one of those organizations to which I will not contribute.Then there were those who were purportedly begging "for the children." It's always "for the children," don't you know? They managed to call upon a child to do their begging:
"There's a possibility, that if you're early in your career, to look elsewhere to go to more promising counties," the 29-year-old Dempsey said.
Natalie Murray, 16, a Prince William County Office on Youth volunteer, said the county was putting "youth as a second priority."
The office on youth, which sponsors teen conferences and work shops, community education and volunteer programs, as well as teen pregnancy and suicide prevention programs, stands to be eliminated this year.
"They're taking away absolutely all of our money," the 16-year-old Murray said.
Actually, Murray is a monument to the failure of government education. No, Natalie, they're not "taking away ... all of [your] money"; they're declining to take away the taxpayers' money to give to you. And, by the by, there are a number of fine private organizations to which individuals sharing your concerns may voluntarily contribute: the Boy Scouts; the Girl Scouts; the Boys and Girls Clubs, to name just three.
The best line of the night by far, though, must have been "tongue-in-cheek," too, though Walker doesn't seem to have recognized it:
A few told the Prince William Board of County Supervisors that they didn't mind paying for services that would be lost if the board adopted a tax rate that is lower than the advertised rate.
Really? Well, here's an idea. One can only hope that the wise souls on the Board (which has gotten markedly wiser in recent months) will create a "Tax Me More" fund, to accept the extra monies that these people will be ponying up to pay for the services that they so desperately want. I would suggest that they start with Zeman, Reynolds, and Murray, and put them to their proofs.
Of course, such efforts have been tried in the past, with little success. You see, there's one common thread among those claiming that "they don't mind paying for services that would be lost."They're lying.
What they really mean is that they want to empower government to extract such monies involuntarily, to insure that the government Leviathan always remains large, powerful, and growing. They don't want to "pay for it." 'Fact is, they want government to force everybody else to "pay for it."
Too bad they lack the honesty to admit it.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
You might be a Democrat if...
... you believe that a woman with a son in her womb should be able to choose to dispatch him to the grave, but a woman with a son in her arms should not be able to choose to dispatch him to the school of her choice.
... you’re more offended by George W. Bush in a flight suit than you were by Bill Clinton without his pants.
... you believe that government should subsidize your perversion of choice (i.e., gay “marriage”), but not your school of choice for your child.
... you believe that spending by government will create more jobs than investment by the “rich.”
... you had on your car an anti-Ollie North bumpersticker that read “Virginia is for Lovers, Not Liars” ... next to one advocating the election of Bill Clinton.
... you believe that John Ashcroft in the Justice Department poses a greater threat to liberty than Joe Stalin in the Kremlin.
... you believe that Clarence Thomas did it to Anita Hill, but Teddy Kennedy did not do it to Mary Jo Kopechne.
... you were more offended by Senator Trent Lott’s (R-MS) words to an old man on his one hundredth birthday than you were by Senator Robert Byrd’s (D-WV, and former KKK member) comments about “white niggers.”
... you think that Mikhail Gorbachev deserves more credit for ending the Cold War than Ronald Reagan.
... you believe that a litmus test on abortion is bad when applied by Republican President, but good when applied by a Democrat President.
... you believe that Clarence Thomas is a radical, but Ruth Bader Ginsberg is not.
... you believe that VMI should admit women on the basis of “equality,” and then amend its physical standards for those women.
... you think the UN is a fine institution, but the Boy Scouts of America is not.
... you’re more offended by a burning cross than you are by a burning flag.
... you believe that an all-white organization is racist, but an all-black organization is not.
... you think all-male schools are sexist, but all-female schools are not.
... you believe that Michael Moore’s book, Stupid White Men, is not autobiographical.
... you believe that allowing children to pray in school violates the First Amendment, but “campaign finance reform” does not.
... the plight of the spotted owl makes you well up with tears, but the playing of Lee Greenwood’s “God Bless the U.S.A.” does not.
... you believe that the “War on Poverty” was worth fighting, but the Cold War was not.
... you are more threatened by guns in the hands of citizens than by guns in the hands of government.
... you believe that teachers’ unions have your children’s best interests at heart.
... you think Richard Nixon was corrupt, but Bill Clinton is not.
... you think Madonna is where she is because of who she slept with, but Hillary Clinton is not.
... you think the First Amendment protects burning the American flag, but not speech criticizing homosexuals.
... you think Hillary Clinton’s life is a model of feminist accomplishment.
... you think that animals should be protected by law, but human fetuses should not.
... you think that there was a vast right-wing conspiracy to get Bill Clinton, but no Communist conspiracy bent on world domination.
... you believe that more government spending will improve everything ... but the military.
... you look at the Iwo Jima Memorial and wonder why there wasn’t a black man there, but didn’t thank God for men such as these.
... you believe that Jerry Falwell should shut up, but Jesse Jackson should not.
... you got more excited about Bill Bennett’s gambling than you did about Bill Clinton’s perjury.
... you think Scooter Libby should be in jail, but Sandy Berger was dealt with justly.
... you think corporate executives are too powerful, but labor union bosses are not.
... you believe that the CIA is more of a threat to freedom than al Qaeda.
... you think that John Stewart and Steve Colbert are incisive and balanced political analysts, but Brit Hume is a partisan hack on an illegitimate network.
... in the 1950s, you were standing in the schoolhouse door to keep black children out, and in the 2000s, you are standing in the schoolhouse door to keep black children in.
... you didn’t find this column hilarious ... and just a little bit tragic.
And just to turn the tables a little more directly, a few variations on "Democracy in Virginia's" theme:
You Might Be A Democrat If...
... you believe the Kennedy's have helped more people than Bill Gates.
... you've named your kids "Dweezil" and "Moonbeam."
... you've tried to argue that poverty could be abolished if people were just given a higher minimum wage, historical evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.
... you've ever assumed that someone was a political ally based solely upon the color of their non-White skin.
... you've ever tried to prove Jesus was an advocate for the Liberal welfare state.
... you oppose the death penalty for guilty criminals, but not for innocent children.
... you think Ronald Reagan was "just another two-bit actor."
... you think that money freely given to political candidates is a greater threat to the American political system than money forcibly extracted from workers by union bosses.
... you think you might remember laughing once as a kid at a racial joke, and now you feel guilty about it.
... your idea of a party is smoking weed and popping pills, but only after you have a good, anti-capitalist protest.
... you call any Republican --- or anyone to the right of Mao --- "far right."
... you've ever said "You can't legislate morality," but you support law against racial and sex discrimination.
... you've ever uttered the phrase, "War never solved anything."
... you've ever said, "I can't wait to get into business school."
... you've think that "Tootsie" was a breakthrough for the transgendered community.
... you believe that there is a "Man."
... you think "Brothers and Sisters" reflects reality, except for that far-right chick dating the Senator.
... just for grins you fax the FBI a list of "Terrorists in my Neighborhood," but it's a list of registered Republicans.
... you read Heather Has Two Mommies to your children, but read Politically Correct Bedtime Stories, and didn't get it.
... you scream "Gore Won Florida!" while making love.
... you've argued that Andy Warhol was an artist.
... when people say "Lennon," you're not thinking of "John."
... you've ever yelled, "Chill out, dude."
... you're under 35, but still claim to have been at Woodstock.
... you argue that peace activists have done more to protect freedom than guns.
... you believe that Vietnam was a spontaneous people's uprising.
... you point to U2's Bono as a great political leader.
... you think that protecting the Nazis right to march in Skokie was a great day for civil liberties .... along with the day that McCain-Feingold was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
... you think that "An Inconvenient Truth" was a documentary.
... you've ever called health care a "right."
... you think that, when corrected for decisions about child-bearing, women still make only $0.74 for every dollar a man makes.
... you wonder why there's an Air Force Academy, a Naval Academy, and a Military Academy, but not a "Peace Academy," and don't realize that --- with the other three --- one is not necessary.
... you came of age in the '60s, and think that impresses anybody.
... you own a vehicle with a "Re-Defeat Bush" sticker.
... you think there's no such thing as "the liberal media," but are afraid of the "vast, right-wing conspiracy."
... you automatically reject any tradition, even though it has withstood the test of time
... you ever told a child that we must "respect other cultures," but contribute to ending female circumcision in Africa.
... you think a handout is just as effective as a hand up.
... you confuse Marx (Groucho) with Marx (Karl).
No results were ever published.
A few months back, Delegate Jeff Frederick (R-52) sent out a constituent survey. I filled it out, and sent it in, too.
And yesterday, received my own copy of the responses (as of mid-March). It makes for interesting reading, suggesting perhaps one reason why Senator John Cha-Ching!-chester decided to get out of Dodge, and even suggesting reasons as to why Chairman Sean (Connaughton) decided that it might be a good time to leave. And the results could not possibly make Governor Timmy! and Virginia Dems optimistic about this Fall's prospects for a Democrat resurgence. Here are some of the results:
The notion that Virginians are not paying enough in taxes was virtually laughed at by Delegate Frederick's constituents. To the question "would you prefer state government raise more revenue through an increase in gas and other taxes, or would your preference be that the state use existing money by prioritizing transportation in the budget?" a whopping 12.6% of those responding wanted higher taxes; 87.4% said "Prioritize transportation." Similarly, 84.8% of respondents support a cap on local government's ability to increase real estate taxes, a result hardly surprising in a County where Chairman Sean's seven-year spending spree increased the average homeowner's bill by 50-60%. Similarly, 85.8% of respondents wanted the promise kept for a 100% phaseout of the car tax.
And transportation was the priority for respndents. 63.7% of respondents said that 100% of the budget surplus should go to transportation. 83.1% of respondents identified "too much runaway development" --- as opposed to "don't pay enough taxes," combination of the two" and "neither" --- as the primary cause of our transportation woes. 83.5% of respondents wanted greater local control of transportation decisions, while 96.7% of respondents support the constitutionally dubious proposition of an adequate local public facilities arrangement.
On other issues, a Conservative education agenda clearly appealed to respondents. 88.1% agreed with the proposition that more than 65% of state education dollars should be spent on children in the classroom, a number that has to be bad news to the overbureaucratized school systems of Northern Virginia.
Finally, responses to three questions on illegal aliens and immigration were telling, indicating 90.4% support for the notion that Virginia law enforcement should detain for deportation those who are pulled over to traffic offenses and other crimes, 93.9% opposition to giving in-state tuition rates at state-supported institutions, and 93.9% support for greater penalties for business hiring illegal aliens.
Interesting. And this is in what many consider to be the most Democrat district represented by a Republicans?!?!?
|New VAYD Leaders|
John Alex Golden
Lambda Caucus Chair Anthony DiRenzo
Sunday, April 01, 2007
The truly sad thing is that it is sometimes difficult to tell the difference, in the Washington Post, between what is a serious piece, and what is a April Fool's joke.
Perhaps it has something to do with the fools on the staff.